On Thursday over at The Athletic, C. Trent Rosecrans posted an outstanding interview with Cincinnati Reds President of Baseball Operations Dick Williams. That interview alone was worth the monthly price for a subscription. There’s a lot of rather interesting stuff within, and I’m not going to give it away. But there was one interesting note from there about Nick Senzel.

After injuring his shoulder late in August he wound up needing to have shoulder surgery to fix a tear in his labrum. Williams noted within the interview that Nick Senzel would be cleared for baseball activities in January and that the injury shouldn’t limit his ability to play anywhere on the field.

There’s two things that are pretty important with that news. First, the expectation is that when spring training rolls around, Nick Senzel should absolutely be ready to go. That’s great news to begin with. But the fact that this isn’t expected to keep him from playing in the outfield is also rather important – both for Senzel and for the Reds.

It was noted earlier this week that the Reds would be looking for a center fielder in free agency this offseason. There’s nothing wrong with that because Nick Senzel can play almost anywhere on the field. If the team can find someone to play center, then Senzel can slide to left, right, or second base. If the team can’t find a center fielder, then maybe they can look for someone the corner outfield spot(s) or second base, or catcher. Having the ability to play all over gives the organization more opportunities to improve the roster.

35 Responses

  1. D Ray White

    Park Senzel at second for the next 7 seasons, bat him 1 or 2, and worry about the other positions. I would not want my vertiginous top young guy banging off of outfield walls.

    Reply
    • Oldtimer

      Wherever you park him, Senzel should be at least 10 years. Like Votto in 2007, the position will be his for quite a while.

      Not saying he is as good as Votto just that he will be a Red for the next decade.

      Reply
      • jon

        He has a long way to go to be worthy of the 2nd pick in the entire draft.

      • Oldtimer

        So did Kurt Stillwell (Reds only previous #2 pick in draft) in mid 1980s. Some guy named Barry Larkin turned out to be better.

      • MK

        But Oldtimer Larkin was a first round pick so he should have beat out a second round pick.

      • Oldtimer

        Stillwell was THE #2 pick overall and in 1st round. You gots to pay attention.

    • rgslone

      I haven’t seen evidence that Senzel should be “parked” anywhere yet. I’m hopeful like everybody else. But, he has done nothing to this point that portends being a star player.

      If he can play an average CF defensively, then I think his offense will probably turn out to be pretty good for the position. At 2B (or 3B – where his defense and speed play up) he simply needs to be much better offensively than he’s shown to be anything other than just “ok”.

      Reply
      • D Ray White

        The Reds are playing subpar talent at 2nd. Peraza is a flailer who does not play good defense. Galvis and Dietrich are bench pieces. Senzel is a superior talent on a team friendly contract. He’s the team’s best prospect since Jay Bruce. Get him comfortable and limit his day to day uncertainty.

    • JLB

      Tend too agree. Proved he could play OF, but injuries indicate he shouldn’t which I ve thought fm get go

      Reply
      • PUSHERMAN

        Naive journalists/reporters I guess. Do you just choose to agree with an awful FO all the time or do you just do it to keep your sites positive?

      • Doug Gray

        My man, if you think I’m always agreeing with the front office you need to read a lot more of the things I write.

        I imagine it won’t matter, though, because your mind is definitely made up already and you aren’t going to budge.

        But if you would just like to be miserable all of the time, I guess go for it. I’d suggest trying something else as a hobby if Reds baseball makes you this way, though. It’ll be better for you in the long run to find something that makes you happy instead of angry.

    • Oldtimer

      The Reds are not close to “contender.” Baby steps. With better bullpen results, they might have been .500 or better in 2019. Maybe over .500 in 2020 and NL Central contender in 2021.

      I’m spoiled. The Reds contended most years in 1960s. Dominated in 1970s. Contended in latter half of 1980s and early half of 1990s. I’m used to the Reds being good. They just haven’t been lately. I would have fired Bryan Price in 2016. Reds didn’t.

      Reply
      • Stock

        The Reds have one division title in the last 24 years and have not won a playoff series since 1995 (25 years) I call that not contending. The Reds never adjusted to the free agency market. Since 1980 they have won the division (and made the playoffs 4 times) The two most recent times they were eliminated in the divisional series. In 1995 they won the first series but came up short in the League Championship. In 1990 they won the World series.

        50% of the time in the last 40 years they finished last or next to last. You may have been spoiled in the 70’s but since then there is little to look forward to.

      • Michael Smith

        Oldtimer you made me look at each decade since the 40’s. Obviously the 70s was the golden era. Your comment about the 60’s made me want to look at things. I counted up the good years (at least a few games over 500) and here is how the last 7 decades have looked

        10’s: 3 good years with 10,12-13. Hard to believe its only been a few years since they at least made the WC 3 out of 4 years

        00’s: Black hole in reds history. 2000 was the only good year but expectations were so high it is not remembered that way.

        90’s: One of the better reds decades. 5 good years with 90, 92, 94-95 and 99.

        80’s: Best of times and the worst of times (pete in 88 and god awful 82-84 era). 6 good but no great years (81 should have been). 80-81, 85-88.

        60’s: 8 good years with two nice runs and technically we could look at 67-81 as streak of pretty good years that will never be matched in Cincinnati. 61-65 and 67-69

        50’s: Another black hole with 56 being the only bright spot

        40’s: Started out great with 40-41 and 43-44 and then bottomed out.

      • Colorado Red

        Since I have been a Reds fan, they have 3 Titles.
        It has not been good lately, but I am a fan, and will be for the rest of me life.
        Yes, they have never adjusted to FA, but I hope this year is different.
        They are finally making changes in how they do things.
        Time will tell.

      • Oldtimer

        https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CIN/ here is a link to the Reds teams from 1882 through 2019.

        Reds joined NL in 1890. In next 70 seasons (through 1960) Reds played in three WS and won two of them.

        In 1960s DeWitt made Reds good. In 1970s Howsam made them great.

        For all her faults, Marge Schott was a good owner from 1984 through 1999. She let baseball people handle baseball decisions. She occasionally said and did dumb/bad things but her Reds teams were pretty good.

    • wes

      Before I found this site, I tried rooting for a different team. Queer how that doesn’t work; guess the heart and mind did not align. So since we aren’t going to talk the ownership into selling the team on Doug’s message board- then why not be optimistic ?? Life is full of tough times- I follow baseball to disconnect from that.

      Y’all think Senzel has hollowed out baseballs instead of tennis balls on the bottom side of his walker?? : D

      Reply
    • Andrew

      Doug def take the back of Reds fromt office all the time. He calls it likes he sees it. Come on man

      Reply
      • MrK

        IDK, seems to agree with FO 9 out of 10. Shuts down those who don’t agree

  2. AirborneJayJay

    If Senzel stays in CF, then the 2B job will go to Galvis and Vanmeter. They won’t go outside for a 2B. If they move Senzel to 2B, they have to go outside to find a CF.
    So, the Reds need to find a CF that would be better offensively than Galvis and Vanmeter in the lineup. That shouldn’t be hard to do. That improves the offense some.
    If Galvis is still on the team by the time spring training rolls around, let alone a starter at 2B, then this winter will be another waste by the front office.
    That is the problem for the Reds. Their front office is very inconsistent. One day it is attaboys all around for the Sonny Gray trade. Then the next day it is all Oh, crap with a trade like the Dodgers trade last winter. I hated that trade when it was made and I hate it even more today. The only redeeming factor that came from that trade was getting Kyle Farmer. The Puig/Turner Ward combo that so many people lauded fell as flat as a tortilla wrap. Both are gone thankfully.
    The trade for Tanner Roark was a neutral one, it wasn’t bad and it wasn’t great. But it was OK. They gave up a quality reliever prospect for him for 4 months and got back in return a so-so CF prospect when they flipped him after 4 months.
    Sounds like Williams is not sold on Aquino as a starter in RF. Williams and Bell are making this team into nothing more than a bunch of platoon players. This is not good for the Reds, nor is it good for baseball. Votto is going to play less against LH pitcher. Winker barely plays against LH pitchers. Vanmeter won’t play against LH pitchers. Ervin is going to sit against RH pitchers. They will sit Aquino against some RH pitching next year.
    Bell is going to need a 10 player bench next year.

    Reply
    • wes

      I’m a fan of the platoon strategy as long as you have the quality player there. Cubs are real big on platoon and it has worked out very well for them. Reds surely do need the bats though! Can’t deny that. But will any sign in cincy??

      One thing is for sure- Castillo/Roark/Gray is better TOR than what Atl or St Louis has- hoping for a big off season!

      Reply
    • citizen54

      That Dodgers trade made no sense. The Reds gave up valuable prospects for a one year chance at mediocrity. Just think how good the farm system would be right now with Downs and Gray. The Reds seem to have a knack for giving up too much for players that other teams don’t want eg Puig, Bauer and Wood.

      I actually liked the Roark trade as the Reds got something out of a flip for a change. And picking up players off the waiver wire is no way to build a team.

      Reply
      • MK

        Everyone raise your hand if you wanted to be rid of the Bailey contract and Bailey. That did not come free. Wood was a quality pick-up that just did not work. Kemp was a waste. Puig was a positive addition and helped acquire Bauer. Farmer was a very positive roster addition. There was a price to be paid for ridding the Bailey albatross and millions of dollars. For that they gave away a couple of Class A prospects and have a nice player on the roster and saved some money.

      • Hanawi

        Except the Reds didn’t really save all that much money. They would have been much better off just eating Bailey’s contract and keeping the players they had.

        Puig was basically a throw-in on that trade. They could have gotten so much more for a top 20 prospect plus a solid second piece (Moss). Could have easily solved their long-term SS or CF issues. The Indians got 3 major league type players just for Trammell.

      • Cguy

        I’m with you MK. Bailey’s contract was an albatross. At the time of the deal, Gennett had a lock on the 2nd base job, Senzel was still considered a 2nd base possibility & Reds had drafted India, plus Long was still in the fold. Downs was expendable. We all knew Josiah had stuff & obviously the Reds would have developed him into a top-of-the-rotation sp. Just like they did with Raisel Iglesias, Michael Lorenzen, Amir Garrett, Robert Stephenson, Sal Romano, Cody Reed, Brandon Finnegan, etc. etc. etc. Maybe not so much.

      • Bill

        Right on MK. There were few detractors of the Dodger trade when it happened. It was a good trade that soured when Wood couldn’t pitch.

        Fans were much more split on the Sonny Gray trade. Many thought the Yankees fleeced the Reds “again.” Those critics are notably silent, today.

        Unless you can produce (and gift it to the Reds) a crystal ball, trades should be judged when they are made. In my view, the decision process was sound on both accounts.

    • Bill

      Why do you think the Reds would avoid upgrading 2B? The Reds have solid pieces around the field, but few star players. Lots of versatility…upgrades can come at nearly any position.

      Reply
  3. RedFuture

    There absolutely be a crusade going to insure that walls have a very thick pad. Are the Cubs able to stifle any possible movement in order to keep the brick & ivy wall. Does a player’s knowledge that the Wrigley wall is brick keep them from slamming into it?

    Reply
  4. DanD

    If the Reds are to look for a CF, who would be available? I am hoping that Marte would be. I do not see any other free agent CF’s that are better than what we have.

    Any candidates at CF for a trade?

    Just a thought, could Suarez be traded for 2 starters (CF, SS or a SP) and a top prospect and put Senzel at 3B?

    Reply
  5. Smittyboy

    I love the Idea for Senzel to play LF or 2nd next year. Reds need to keep him healthy. What that means for Winker, I’m not sure. But we’ll need to move some pieces around for better offense/bullpen arm.

    Since it is 2019 and we all love to play GM. I’d love to see Reds sign Grandal and trade for Jackie Bradley Jr. This upgrades our offense + gets our defense better.

    Reply
    • Michael Smith

      @smitty,

      Seznel’s value drops at left field. His bat would not stand out compared to the in house platoon we could have with Winker and Ervin and he defensive value would be wasted.

      Reply
  6. Mbs

    I used to think Senzel was better suited for RF with his arm speed and D. With his injuries, I think 2B is the way to go. Which means Galvis should inherit SS. That would be a solid infield, having both VanMeter and Farmer as back ups.

    Reds get Marte, and Grandal to upgrade this offense!

    Reply
    • Frank Barton

      The Reds need an outfielder (Preferably a lefty) who can:
      handle the position defensively
      drive in runs
      STAY ON THE FIELD

      I’m afraid that Winker and Senzel won’t fill the bill. Too lost games to the IL

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.